Cascade to Revolution
Digital technology and social media can play a profound role in initiating a revolution, as observed with the Arab Spring in 2010. Academics, politicians, and citizens alike have all studied this effect, to varying degrees of rigor. One common insight is that of an information cascade as a model for revolution in the Arab Spring.
However, sources often use the term loosely, defining the cascade as one in which people “make decisions on the basis of their observations of other peoples’ actions.” Information cascades, at least in our Networks class, contain an additional component – that people only see the choices and final decisions that others make without full knowledge of the signals or intentions of other. This is not necessarily the case with social media, as people can declare their purpose, backgrounds, and reasons behind their agendas (although given that this happens online initially, in some kind of secure space, there is no guarantee that they are entirely truthful).
Loosely speaking, information cascades do seem helpful in explaining the origins of The Arab Spring. The Arab Spring was unusual in its speed – the revolution was a considerable surprise to governments and the rest of the world. While people were clearly unsatisfied, there was also no strong opposition to indicate a bubbling revolution. Social media allows individuals to communicate and provides a safe(r) space for members to voice their opinions, replacing old physical safe houses such as the black church for the civil rights movement and literary circles in communist Eastern Europe. If no one protests, you are also not likely to protest, which follows the 0 point equilibrium as seen in class. However, once people see how others feel, they build up a community before reaching a tipping point where the social media information cascade takes off and a protest can occur en masse. Some papers also mention not only information cascades, but simultaneous identity cascades in which active dissent increases societal polarization, with increasing dissent leading to an increasing pressure to choose sides. There is safety in numbers – the more people protest, the safe it would be for you to protest as well, so there is a kind of direct benefit in this, provided you feel also desire to protest. Governments are also unlikely to completely shut down social media platforms to prevent dissent; in the “Cute Cat” theory popularized by Ethan Zuckerman, these mainstream platforms cannot be shut down without risk of polarizing society and angering people to an extreme degree.
The Arab Spring was just an example where the voices of ordinary citizens contributed to a sudden revolution. In the spirit of the recent elections, remember that your voice matters, and it can contribute to an information cascade.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/10/mass-movements
http://www.meta-activism.org/2011/11/arab-spring-what-did-we-learn-about-tech-and-revolution/